Many of us here frequently use MathJax, whether for this site or another site on the SE Network. Recently SE added support for tables, but ignored the needs of the TeX community, who wish to be able to type TeX symbols/formulas/etc. as well.

This is the feature request on Meta.SE, to support MathJax in tables.

Here's some network-wide examples where such support would be needed (please add anymore if you're aware of any!):

Update: Since creating this feature request on Meta.SE, we can now see that MathJax works in the tables, for most examples:

A header Another header
Limit $\lim\limits_{x\to\infty} f(x)$
Matrix $\begin{pmatrix}1&2\\0&1\end{pmatrix}$
Cardinals $\mathfrak c^{\aleph_0}=\mathfrak c$
Equation with a tag \begin{equation} x^2+y^2=z^2 \tag{1} \end{equation}
Centered formula $$F_{n+2}=F_{n+1}+F_n$$
Is the right-side ruined just because there's Mathjax in the header? $\int e^x=f(u)n$
$\int e^x = f(u)n$

More discussion about this, including all the Markup code for everything that was tested so far, can be found at the Meta.SE post.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Ok, but we can already make tables directly in MathJax. Do we really need to be able to put MathJax inside Markdown tables? $\endgroup$
    – PM 2Ring
    Commented Dec 6, 2020 at 17:58
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @PM2Ring The 4 examples I gave do exactly what you suggested, but needed to make the entire table in MathJax just for a tiny number of symbols such as $^3\Sigma$ for "triplet sigma" states. We most certainly 100% need to be able to put MathJax in Markdown tables. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 6, 2020 at 18:01

1 Answer 1

Table support Working $\Large\checkmark$
MathJax support in tables test: $\int e^x dx = f(x)$ -- yes, it works! $\Large\checkmark$
Feature requests for MathJax support Successful! $\Large\checkmark$ (no longer needed)
Additional issues Unclear -- not explained in this thread
Nature of support requested from this community Unclear -- not explained in this thread

This thread looks , insofar as all the goals laid out in the text of the question here have been achieved.

Sincere thanks for keeping on top of this as soon as the table support was added, and for pushing the dev team to make this work so fast -- and congratulations on achieving it!

If this still requires additional support from this community, please do let us know by updating this thread with the details of (i) what aspects of the software are still not ready, and (ii) what we can do to help.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks. There is still the bug that occurs when you try to put MathJax in the headers. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 10, 2020 at 20:22
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @user1271772 Thanks for explaining. Are there real-world examples where this would be useful? $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 10, 2020 at 22:34
  • $\begingroup$ Yes I'll give some examples where MathJax is needed in the header, later once I've finished some other things and acquired time to go and take a screenshot of those tables. However at the moment the highest voted feature-request on the Meta.SE post is to allow lowercase letters in the headers (currently the headers have to be in all caps, unbelievable!). One way around that is to use $\textrm{Lower case header}$ but that messes up the equations that are in that column. These might be "edge cases" but SE can take ages to fix bugs, so it might be good to get them all fixed early while attention. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 10, 2020 at 22:46
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Thanks for explaining. I would strongly disagree on using MathJax as a fix for formatting (and indeed we just had a discussion reaching that same conclusion), but that's beside the point. Indeed, there is a short window of time to get SE to fix this kind of bugs before they lose interest and move on to other projects. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 10, 2020 at 23:17
  • $\begingroup$ I agree, it's not ideal to use MathJax as a fix for Markdown's inability to put lower case letters in headers. Give me some time for me to give some screenshots of tables that need MathJax in the headers. I'll be taking it from my own 2011 paper, but I'm in a Zoom call and don't have much time tonight. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 10, 2020 at 23:25

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .